Will you be participating in curriculum writing this year? If so, mapping resources to the district curriculum is a critical task in the process. Having materials mapped to the district curriculum saves teachers hours of work and helps facilitate standards-aligned instruction. This two-part blog series contains stepped-out guidance and important tips to help you map your resources to the district's curriculum.  The first blog provides tips to help you prepare for an efficient process. We discuss: developing a common definition of alignment, becoming familiar with your materials, and selecting citations (lessons, activities quizzes) in your materials to map to the district curriculum. The second blog  discusses: how to cite the aligned content in your material, where to look for additional aligned citations, resources for resolving alignment disagreements, and more.  If these DIY resources do not provide sufficient support, consider our new online courses : What Alignment Means and Why It Matters  (and How to Do It!) Mapping Instructional Materials to Your Curriculum These two-hour, self-paced courses provide instruction, skills practice, and a workbook to help you master the art of mapping your instructional materials to your district curriculum. Individual educators can enroll in a pre-scheduled course ($35 per course). Participants have two weeks to complete the course, and a certificate of completion is provided for professional learning credit. Alternatively, districts/campuses can enroll in a "closed" course facilitated by Learning List's Chief Academic Officer.   Contact us to learn more about the courses.

The state’s math standards recently changed, and your district purchased new instructional materials for mathematics. Teachers use the materials for a few months, but when students struggle to master the content, the teachers grow skeptical about the material’s quality. Increasingly, they turn to lesson resources they have developed themselves or borrowed from their colleagues. The district’s math materials gather dust, and district leaders are left with curriculum chaos. That scenario, which has played out in districts across the country for decades, was our impetus for founding Learning List a decade ago and remains our call to action.  This week is Learning List’s 10th anniversary, a time for celebration and reflection. We founded Learning List’s subscription-based instructional materials review service as an economical way to help educators access independent, evidence-based curriculum reviews to inform districts/campuses' purchasing decisions.  Over the years, other entities have begun reviewing instructional materials, including more state education agencies. So, what sets Learning List apart?  We expand districts’ choices and inform local control.  Like Consumer Reports®, Learning List is a private company, independent from publishers and free from political influence. States and other review entities rate and rank materials with the goal of identifying "the best" materials for districts to use. We do not. We calculate an alignment percentage, but we do not rank or rate the materials we review. We provide our subscribing districts with access to easy-to-read, evidence-based reviews of thousands of widely-used PreK-12 instructional materials and comparison tools that empower them to select the materials that best meet  their students’  needs.  We provide a curriculum review service . While states' and other entities' reviews are driven by publishers' submissions, requests from subscribing districts drive our review process. Consequently, our library is filled with reviews of the materials districts are most interested in. We also assist districts in finding answers to selection-related questions and help facilitate local adoption processes. In short, Learning List provides a review service , not just a website with reviews. Our curriculum reviews are published within a timeframe that meets educators' needs. Most review entities take months to publish their reviews. While each material is reviewed by multiple subject matter experts , our efficient review methodology and strict adherence to deadlines enable us to publish an alignment report , instructional quality review , and technology compatibility review for each material within six weeks of the material's submission. We have reviewed many more and a greater variety of materials than other entities. Other entities review materials aligned to a specific state's standards or national standards. We have reviewed materials aligned to multiple states’ and national standards. We have reviewed more than 3,300 core and supplemental materials published by almost 200 publishers . Our reviews span the four core subjects and several others, including Career & Technical Education, Health Education, Technology Applications, and Advanced Placement courses. No other review entity has the equivalent breadth or depth of experience reviewing materials. Our reviews and tools are useful beyond the selection process. Most other entities produce reviews to help educators select materials. Our reviews and online tools inform instruction, as well as selection decisions. Educators use our standard-by-standard alignment reports and comparison tools to develop targeted instruction and/or intervention with the materials they have purchased. As educators know all too well, the price does not necessarily equate with value. Despite the existence of free reviews, we are celebrating our 10th anniversary because the value districts get from our review service far exceeds the low subscription price. Over the years, we have added other curriculum support services to meet districts’ evolving needs. We look forward to partnering with many more districts to expand their capacity, relieve their workload and provide peace of mind.

Over the last three years, yours, like most districts, likely scrambled to meet students’ needs in lots of new ways. The district may have purchased new materials to support at-home learning. Teachers may have subscribed to online resources individually.  And, since students returned to school, intervention and tutoring resources have likely been purchased. When you analyze the current list of materials in your district, do you have an abundance of instructional materials? If so, are all being utilized, and are they meeting the needs of your students and educators? Having too many instructional materials can be as challenging as not having enough materials. Too many resources complicate teacher planning and can lead to a lack of consistency in curriculum implementation across classrooms or campuses. The result: curriculum chaos. Auditing your instructional materials will help you determine which materials are adding value for students and educators and which are no longer meeting their needs. Below are 4 steps to help you audit your current instructional materials : Inventory your materials: Create a list of the materials being used in each grade and subject or course. Identify where you have instructional materials that appear to be duplicative. Add columns to your list to answer the following questions for grades and subjects or courses where you appear to have an abundance of materials. Material type: Is the material core, supplemental, test prep, or intervention? Alignment: Does the material have a correlation to the standards? Has the alignment to standards been verified? Student Supports: Are the materials designed to support specific student needs (e.g., closed captioning, translations, audio support, visual content) Student Supports: Are the materials designed to support specific student needs (e.g., closed captioning, translations, audio support, visual content) ? Cost: What is the unit cost of the material (one-time purchase or subscription)? Identify redundancies: Are there supplemental materials in your list that appear redundant in terms of material type, students served, and targeted standards? For each of those materials determine the following: Which of those has the higher alignment percentage? Which has the higher usage rate? After completing the audit share the results with stakeholders in your district such as curriculum staff, English learner and bilingual coordinators, principals, and your instructional materials selection committee. Let the data guide your decisions about which materials to keep and which to discontinue. As with selecting new materials , eliminating materials is an important decision. Thus, using a data-driven process with buy-in from educators will help you reduce curriculum chaos and bring organization to your instructional materials.

The start of a new school year is full of excitement, new routines, and possibilities. One of the most important steps teachers can take to set the tone for success is ensuring their daily instruction is aligned with both standards and curriculum resources. Alignment creates a roadmap for teaching and learning, providing clarity for teachers and students alike. Below are five practical strategies to help you begin the year with confidence and ensure every lesson builds toward meaningful outcomes. 1. Start with the Standards Standards are the backbone of alignment. Before planning daily lessons, revisit your state standards and ask: What are students expected to know and be able to do by the end of this unit?  Unpack the standards to ensure that you and your team know the content, the context, and the cognitive rigor of each standard in the unit. By using standards as the anchor, you ensure that every activity, discussion, and assignment connects to the larger learning goals. Research from the RAND Corporation underscores this, noting that teachers who ground instruction in clear standards and high-quality instructional materials report stronger outcomes for students (Kaufman, Doan, & Diliberti, Teachers’ Use of High-Quality Instructional Materials , RAND Corporation, 2020). 2. Use HQIM Curriculum Resources to Anchor Lessons High-quality instructional materials (HQIM) are designed to provide a coherent progression of learning. Instead of starting your lesson planning from scratch, use HQIM as the foundation. Pacing guides, lesson sequences, and embedded activities help ensure that daily instruction supports grade-level expectations. Confirm that every activity aligns with the standards—or save time by using Learning List’s alignment reports. As instructional expert Doug Lemov explains, “When curriculum, instruction, and assessment are tightly aligned, students get a coherent learning experience that builds mastery step by step” ( Teach Like a Champion 2.0 , Jossey-Bass, 2015).  3. Plan with Assessments in Mind Backward planning is essential for alignment. Start with the end in mind: What should students know or be able to demonstrate on the unit or state assessment?  Once you’ve identified success criteria, design lessons that intentionally build toward that outcome. The National Institute for Excellence in Teaching emphasizes that alignment between instruction and assessment ensures that instructional time is maximized and that all students have access to grade-level content. 4. Adapt, Don’t Abandon Alignment doesn’t mean teaching curriculum resources exactly as written. Instead, it’s about making thoughtful adaptations to meet your students’ diverse needs while maintaining the integrity of the lesson. For example, you might adjust pacing, add scaffolds for English learners, or provide enrichment for advanced students. As Carol Ann Tomlinson, a leading voice in differentiation reminds us, “Differentiation is not the opposite of alignment—it is how we ensure aligned resources meet the diverse needs of learners” ( How to Differentiate Instruction in Academically Diverse Classrooms , ASCD, 2017). 5. Collaborate with Colleagues Alignment is strengthened when teams work together to use HQIM. When teachers plan together sharing pacing calendars, assessments, strategies, and resources, they create consistency across classrooms. This ensures that all students access the same high-quality, standards-aligned instruction. Collaboration also reduces the burden on individual teachers. By pooling ideas and resources, teachers can focus more energy on engaging students and personalizing instruction. Bringing It All Together Alignment is about clarity and coherence. By starting with standards, grounding instruction in HQIM, planning backward from assessments, adapting for diverse learners, and collaborating with colleagues, you can ensure your instruction remains focused and purposeful throughout the year. Remember: alignment is not about rigidity. It is about providing a consistent, high-quality experience that helps all students thrive. When your instruction is aligned to the standards and your curriculum, both you and your students begin the year with clarity—and clarity leads to success.

Dreambox is a supplemental digital math program for grades K-8. Learning List recently reviewed Dreambox for grades K-5.  About Dreambox Dreambox is self-paced and adaptive to address multiple learning levels. The program is available in English and Spanish. It provides math lessons and practice in an engaging, fully adaptive, digital format. The digital lesson environments are age-appropriate and can be assigned by the teacher. Dreambox lessons focus on developing conceptual understanding, procedural skills, and fact fluency. Teachers assign the initial grade level to each student and the program adapts each lesson to meet the needs of the student. As a result, every student has a unique lesson pathway. Teachers can also assign specific lessons to individual students or to the class. Teachers can track student progress by standard, minutes active, and lessons completed using easy-to-read reports automatically generated by the system. A Family Dashboard whichvallows parents and guardians to monitor student progress encourages the home-school connection. About Learning List Learning List has completed a standard-by-standard alignment report, qualitative review of the instructional content, and a review of the technology compatibility for each grade level covered by this material.  To learn more about this product and thousands more PreK-12 instructional materials, contact Learning List for subscription information. About Dreambox * Dreambox’s mission is to radically transform the way the world learns. The company's vision: “We believe all children can excel at learning, no matter where they start, where they live, or who they are. Along with district administrators, teachers, principals, and parents, we are dedicated to helping children realize their potential. Yet every child must be challenged, encouraged, and engaged in an individual way.” *Information in this section is provided by or adapted from Dreambox .

Does your district need practice material for mathematics? Take a look at Learning List’s review of DeltaMath INTEGRAL. Overview of DeltaMath INTEGRAL INTEGRAL is a fully digital, supplemental mathematics program for grades 6-12. Learning List recently reviewed the content for grades 6-8 and Algebra I. The program intends to supplement core mathematics instruction by providing practice problems and opportunities for students to develop mathematical content and skills. The program provides a bank of practice problems organized by topic and standard. Some question types are consistent with the STAAR redesign question types in Texas. The problems address general mathematics skills and concepts but do not typically address process standards or real-world contexts. Assessments are not included; however, the program enables teachers to create assessments based on specific skills or Texas Essential Knowledge Skills (TEKS). Additionally, teachers can customize multiple assignment features to create assignments and assessments for students that correlate to the instruction they are providing. Progress monitoring is supported at the teacher, campus, and district levels. Learn More With Learning List's Reviews Learning List  has reviewed the instructional quality and technology compatibility of DeltaMath INTEGRAL , as well as the program's alignment to the TEKS. Contact info@Learninglist.com  for information about a low-cost subscription to access Learning List's reviews of this program and thousands of other widely used K-12 instructional materials. About DeltaMath* DeltaMath is an online mathematics practice platform created by math teacher Zach Korzyk in 2009. The program provides teachers with a large set of automatically graded math problem sets that students complete online. Teachers can assign practice, monitor student progress, and review performance data through the platform. DeltaMath is used in classrooms and for independent practice to support instruction across a range of mathematics topics. * Information in this section is provided by or adapted from DeltaMath

Learning List has reviewed Curriculum Associates’ Ready Florida Mathematics, a supplemental resource for grades K-8 that supports math instruction and mastery of the Mathematics Florida Standards (MAFS). Materials are available in print format with additional online components. Learning List’s review is of print materials only. About Ready Florida Mathematics Across grades, instruction addresses grade-specific MAFS while developing students’ understanding of key concepts and their ability to apply concepts to solve real-world problems. Ready Florida Mathematics Student Instruction Books structure instruction at each grade in units organized by the MAFS Domains (e.g., Measurement and Data). Units open with a short feature that describes what students will learn and the real-world applications of the content. Instruction is presented in short, scaffolded lessons that focus on one or more MAFS, and the Mathematical Practice Standards (MPS) are integrated throughout instruction Lessons include an Introduction that frames new content in terms of a “big idea” question, modeled and guided instruction, guided practice, and MAFS practice problems. Across lesson sections, illustrated characters, or “Study Buddies,” appear in the margins to pose questions and provide tips to guide students’ thinking. Instruction emphasizes how the skills students are learning build across grade levels. Across grades, the table of contents in both teacher and student editions references the MAFS, including the Major Emphasis and Supporting and Additional Areas of Emphasis, addressed by each lesson. The table of contents in Teacher Resource Books also references the MPS embedded in instruction. Learn More With Learning List's Reviews Learning List  has reviewed the instructional quality and technology compatibility of Curriculum Associates'  Ready Florida Mathematics program, as well as the program's alignment to the MA FS. Contact info@Learninglist.com  for information about a low-cost subscription to access Learning List's reviews of this program and thousands of other widely used K-12 instructional materials. About Curriculum Associates* Curriculum Associates' connected portfolio of assessments, evidence-based curricula, and professional learning provides teachers with insights and tools to better understand and support every learner. The company's products, which include i-Ready®, Ready®, and BRIGANCE®, provide teachers and administrators with flexible resources that deliver meaningful assessments and data-driven, differentiated instruction for children. Information in this section is provided by or adapted from Curriculum Associates .

Learning List has reviewed print materials for ­­Curriculum Associates’ Ready Florida English Language Arts program. About Ready Florida English Language Arts Ready Florida English Language Arts is a supplemental resource for grades K-8 that supports reading instruction and mastery of the Language Arts Florida Standards (LAFS). Materials are available in print format with additional digital components. Instruction addresses grade-level LAFS while developing students’ critical thinking skills and understanding of literary and informational texts. Ready Florida English Language Arts Student Instruction Books present content in units that address LAFS Anchor Standards (e.g., Craft and Structure in Literature). Units are made up of week-long lessons that focus on a particular theme (e.g., adventure) and genre (e.g., realistic fiction). Instruction is structured using the Gradual Release of Responsibility (i.e., GRR) instructional model. The first day of each lesson is an introduction that provides a student-friendly explanation of what students will learn (i.e., the standard), reading strategies, and the steps to follow to implement strategies. Subsequent days provide modeled and guided Instruction, guided practice, and independent practice. Each day includes a writing activity. At each grade level, Teacher Resource Books contain materials to assist teachers in the transition to the LAFS and in using Ready Florida materials. Resource Books provide a crosswalk document that explains how the Ready Florida program addresses the demands of the LAFS, and a table detailing the research supporting Ready Florida language arts strategies (e.g., close reading, scaffolded instruction). A pair of tables (1) identifies lesson activities and problems that require higher-level thinking as measured by Webb’s Depth of Knowledge index, and (2) presents a “Cognitive Rigor Matrix” that combines Webb’s and Bloom’s indicators of higher-level thinking and describes student behaviors that demonstrate higher-level thinking. Learn More With Learning List's Reviews Learning List  has reviewed the instructional quality and technology compatibility of Curriculum Associates'  Ready Florida English Language Arts program, as well as the program's alignment to the LAFS. Contact info@Learninglist.com  for information about a low-cost subscription to access Learning List's reviews of this program and thousands of other widely used K-12 instructional materials. About Curriculum Associates* Curriculum Associates' connected portfolio of assessments, evidence-based curricula, and professional learning provides teachers with insights and tools to better understand and support every learner. The company's products, which include i-Ready®, Ready®, and BRIGANCE®, provide teachers and administrators with flexible resources that deliver meaningful assessments and data-driven, differentiated instruction for children. Information in this section is provided by or adapted from Curriculum Associates .

If you have perceived an increase in state control over the adoption of instructional materials, you are not alone. This blog explains the reason for the shift away from districts' control over the selection and use of instructional materials. In a recent EdWeek article , education leaders who shaped the standards movement argue “that states should be doing more ‘quality control’ when it comes to instructional materials—signaling which are high-quality and incentivizing and supporting districts to use them.” Citing the findings of a 2022 RAND Corporation study , the architects of the Common Core State Standards argue that states that have implemented 1) a vetting process to identify high-quality instructional materials, and 2) professional learning to support the implementation of those materials, have seen improvement in student achievement. It seems difficult to draw that conclusion based on the findings of the RAND study which, as explained below, draws no connection between specific state policies and student achievement results. It is noteworthy that the development of the Common Core state standards and the Rand Study referenced above were funded by The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and CCSSO and EdReports also receive funding from The Gates Foundation. The High-Quality Instructional Materials and Professional Development (IMPD) Network The RAND study analyzed the work of the High-Quality Instructional Materials and Professional Development (IMPD) Network. Formed in 2017, the IMPD Network is a group of 13 states convened by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) to promote districts' adoption and teachers' use of high-quality instructional materials (HQIM). The IMPD Network initially included 8 states: Delaware, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Wisconsin, which dropped out in 2022. Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Ohio, and Texas had joined by 2020. (Doan, et al. 2022, 7) Instructional Materials and Professional Development Network (IMPD) Strategies Pursuant to the CCSSO policy roadmap , the IMPD Network states implement a variety of "signals and incentives" to encourage the adoption, use, and support of HQIMs by districts and teachers. These include: (1) Signaling the quality of materials: All IMPD network states provide information about the quality of instructional materials to guide districts about the types of materials they should adopt. Recognizing that states have varying definitions of HQIM, the study focuses on standards alignment as a universal measure of quality. For purposes of this study, the term "standards-aligned curriculum materials" refers to any materials that EdReports has judged as fully meeting the expectations of college-and career-ready standards. (Doan, et al. 2022, xi) In other words, materials counted as HQIMs for purposes of this study are not necessarily aligned to state standards. Besides identifying state-sanctioned HQIMs, other signals these states are using to encourage districts to adopt HQIM include (a) posting a list of the instructional materials districts are using on the state department of education's website, and (b) posting guidance/rubrics to facilitate districts' selection of HQIM. A few of the Network states mandate district adoption of state-adopted instructional materials. (2) Incentivizing the adoption of HQIM: Most network states also tie funding, including Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relieve (ESSER) funds, state grants, and competitive funding, to the selection of HQIM . In other words, districts are not eligible for grants unless they agree to use certain state-sanctioned HQIMs. Some IMPD Network states also enter into state contracts with HQIM publishers to lower the price and make it easier for districts to purchase HQIMs. (3) Providing professional learning aligned to the HQIM: Most IMPD Network states also incentivize districts to purchase HQIMs by providing school/district staff with professional learning aligned to the HQIMs to ensure successful implementation. The states also incentivize districts to select certain professional learning vendors that meet state-adopted criteria. (4) Engaging  with educator preparation programs : IMPD Network states are beginning to work with teacher prep programs to increase focus on using HQIM within classes and clinical experiences. (Doan, et al. 2022, 8-9) Table A.1. identifies the specific signals and incentives that have been implemented in each of the 13 IMPD states. (Doan, et al. 2022, 91-93). While cloaked in terms of fostering local control (e.g., encouraging, incentivizing), the IMPD Network states' signals and incentives actually limit districts' choice of instructional materials. RAND Report's Theory of Action and Findings So have the IMPD signals and incentives worked? The RAND study set out to investigate the extent to which being in the IMPD network predicted districts' adoption and teachers' use of standards-aligned materials. The study analyzed teacher survey responses collected through the American Instructional Resources Surveys (AIRS) since 2019. (Doan, et al. 2022, 6) Comparing the responses of teachers in the 13 IMPD Network states to teachers nationally, the authors conclude that "participation in the IMPD Network was positively linked to the usage of standards-aligned materials," (Doan, et al. 2022, 86). However, they also acknowledge that there was "a high level of variation across the 13 states in the IMPD Network regarding the adoption of standards-aligned materials" in math (Doan, et al. 2022, 20) and ELA. (Doan, et al. 2022, 23). As illustrated in Figure 3.6: (1) for ELA, 41% of teachers in the original IMPD Network states and 38% of teachers in the new IMPD Network states reported that their district had adopted at least one standards-aligned material as compared with 29% of teachers in non-IMPD network states. (2) for math, 56% of teachers in the original IMPD Network states and 30% of teachers in new IMPD Network states reported that their district adopted at least one standards-aligned material as compared to 45% of teachers in non-IMPD states. (Doan, et al. 2022, 28) The data show that after three years of implementing the IMPD's signals and incentives, the number of districts that have adopted at least one standards-aligned curriculum has increased by approximately 10 percent. Report's Suggestions for State and District Policymakers The study makes the following suggestions to state and district policymakers: (1) State networks, like the IMPD Network, have great potential for shifting teaching and learning at scale . The authors acknowledge, however, "We do not know as much about the specific mechanisms by which the IMPD Network has led to shifts across participating states and whether shifts in the usage of standards-aligned materials will be sustained and have clear effects on student achievement, which could be the focus on follow-on research." (Doan, et al. 2022, 88) (2) To increase usage of and support for standards-aligned materials in the classroom, focus first on encouraging adoption of standards-aligned materials . The authors repeatedly note that districts' adoption of standards-aligned materials is a critical precursor to teachers' use of those materials: "Very few teachers reported that they used a standards-aligned material if they did not report that their school or district had adopted one." (Doan, et al. 2022, 89) (3) State requirements likely encourage more adoption of standards-aligned materials, but other levers, such as those increasing buy-in for use of standards-aligned materials among principals and teachers, might also encourage adoption and use . The study highlights the fact that states that mandated district adoption of HQIMs saw an increase in teachers' use of those materials. However, a few other states, such as Louisiana, Delaware and Nebraska, also saw increases in teachers' use of standards-aligned materials without mandates. The authors conclude that "absent mandates, much consensus-building, long-term work is necessary to encourage a high rate of usage of standards-aligned materials." (4) Encouraging buy-in among principals and teachers regarding the importance of using standards-aligned materials—rather than simply requiring use—could be an effective strategy for encouraging more use of those materials . Suggested principal-focused strategies include (a) professional development to help school leaders promote the implementation of HQIM in their schools, and (b) state-created tools for teacher observations that include consideration of whether teachers use HQIM in their lessons. (Doan, et al. 2022, 89) (5) Efforts to improve teachers’ understanding of what is standards-aligned and what is not could encourage greater usage of standards-aligned materials . One strategy to improve teacher buy-in and perceived adequacy of their materials was the use of curriculum ambassadors or lead teachers who serve as advocates for the material and support their colleagues in implementing HQIM. (Doan, et al. 2022, 89-90) (6) School systems leaders must lean into supports for standards-aligned materials to ensure uptake in usage . The report states, "As indicated by our findings, states likely play a large role in the adoption of standards-aligned materials. . . . chool systems themselves likely play the greatest role when it comes to the provision of supports, which, in turn, are connected to higher usage of standards-aligned materials. " (Doan, et al. 2022, 90) Our Analysis In the wake of the 2008 recession, many states loosened the reigns on districts' selection of instructional materials. Several states abandoned their state adoption process completely; others made the state adoption lists advisory rather than obligatory. Over the last few years, the pendulum has started to swing back and the RAND study explains why. Thirteen states in the CCSSO-led IMPD have implemented policies to wrest control over the selection and use of instructional materials away from districts and teachers with the goal of increasing the quality of materials used in the classrooms. How many more states will join the IMPD Network? Time will tell. The EdWeek article and RAND study cited above certainly aim to encourage participation. Policymakers and educators agree that using standards-aligned, high-quality materials fuels student achievement. They disagree over who should decide which materials are high quality. The architects of the Common Core and the CCSSO believe states should make that determination. However, local control over the selection and use of instructional materials is a long-held and deeply-rooted belief. To facilitate the achievement of the communal goal while also respecting local control, Learning List provides a range of resources, including online professional development courses , state-specific instructional material alignment reviews , and online Selection Toolkit , that empower districts and educators to select materials that are aligned to their state standards and provide the instruction and supports their students need. * Doan, Sy, Julia H. Kaufman, Ashley Woo, Andrea Prado Tuma, Melissa Kay Diliberti, and Sabrina Lee. 2022, " How States Are Creating Conditions for Use of High-Quality Instructional Materials in K–12 Classrooms: Findings from the 2021 American Instructional Resources Survey ." https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA134-13.html .

Caveat Emptor … a Latin phrase meaning, “Buyer Beware.” For centuries buyers have been held to a standard of due diligence; do your homework before you buy or suffer the consequences. Purchasing instructional materials is the single largest annual purchase a school district typically makes. To put it in context: school districts spend more on instructional materials annually than you paid for your house. A purchase that large certainly merits careful due diligence. Before we purchase a house, we engage a realtor and spend weeks even months visiting multiple houses on the market. We compare the features of each house against our mental list of "must haves" and select the house that exhibits the largest number of our "must-haves." Do districts exercise the same level of diligence before purchasing instructional materials? Traditionally, reviewing instructional materials before the district makes its selection decisions is a task delegated to overworked educators. Teachers review the available materials at vendor fairs, in their “spare” time at school and at home, and during interminable selection committee meetings. The same process is relied upon despite the fact that instructional materials have become increasingly complex and difficult to review. So, when it comes to buying new materials, how does your district avoid making a (multi) million-dollar mistake? Here are a few common mistakes districts make when purchasing instructional materials and some suggested solutions. Mistake #1: Rushing to Select Instructional Materials Many districts believe sooner is better when it comes to making a selection decision. Their goal is to complete their instructional materials selection process by early February or March. Some do this to ensure that the materials reach classrooms before school starts. However, most core materials are now available digitally, eliminating the need for a long delivery timeline. Other districts believe that state law requires school boards to approve materials by March or early April. In Texas, for example, districts must submit requisitions to purchase state-adopted materials to the Texas Education Agency by June 1st of the proclamation year. While publishers may impose a deadline for orders, most states do not require districts to purchase materials by a date certain. It is not wise to rush your selection and review process. Most new-to-market materials are not completed until a few months before they are to be delivered. Publishers start selling the concept of a material long before the material is finally published. Similarly, in "adoption" states, publishers submit the content of their new materials for state and public review, while the product features and functionality are still being built. Districts that rely on the publishers' claims or rely on the publicly available digital samples are relying on publishers' promises of what the product will look like, do, and contain. While publishers may intend to develop all of the functionality promised, 11th-hour production impediments may prevent the final product from containing all of those features. Bottom line : since most core instructional materials are available digitally, districts generally do not need to order materials as early as they used to. It is prudent to wait to make selection decisions until you have reviewed the available published products. Doing so will likely result in less disappointment and fewer purchased materials that go unused. Mistake #2: Believing Publisher's Alignment Claims First, why is alignment so important? Teachers expect that the district-provided core materials are aligned to 100% of the state's standards. If those materials are not 100% aligned, teachers may not teach all the knowledge/skills required by the standards. If students are not taught what the standards require them to know and be able to do, they are less likely to succeed academically. Teachers, as well as campuses and districts, are evaluated based on their students’ performance. In sales presentations, publishers generally claim that their materials are "aligned to the ." After all, if they did not make such claims, districts would not purchase their materials. Having reviewed thousands of PreK-12 instructional materials, Learning List can state with certainty, that most materials are not as well aligned to the state standards as publishers claim. Bottom line : the alignment of your district's instructional materials will inevitably impact students' scores, which in turn will impact teacher evaluations and campus and district ratings. Therefore, it is crucial to know the alignment percentage of materials your district is considering purchasing. If your district decides to have teachers review the alignment of the materials being considered for adoption, it is important to have more than one teacher check the alignment of each material for each grade level. Why? Determining alignment is an inherently subjective endeavor. Having a few teachers working together to check the material's alignment reduces the subjectivity of alignment determinations. This whitepaper discusses common alignment challenges and strategies for overcoming them. If the district lacks the time or capacity to perform alignment reviews internally, Learning List's low-cost subscription instructional materials review service provides access to independent alignment reviews of thousands of the most widely used PreK-12 instructional materials conducted by highly experienced, trained educators . Mistake #3: Assuming Alignment is Consistent Across Grade Levels It is easy to assume that the alignment percentage of a material for one grade level is reflective of the material's alignment at all grade levels. Learning List's alignment reviews tell another story. There are many reasons why the alignment of a material may vary significantly from grade level to grade level. A different author may have written the material's content and/or a different person may have constructed the publisher's correlation at each grade level. The material's content may not progress in rigor at the same pace as the standards do. The material may not address a certain strand or domain that is emphasized more in one grade level than others. Bottom line : to prepare students effectively to master the standards, teachers must know which standards the material is aligned to in each grade level so that they can adjust their instructional strategies accordingly. Do not assume that the alignment percentage at one grade level is representative of the product’s alignment at all grade levels, or even at all grade levels within a single grade span. If your district is going to purchase multi-grade level material, check the alignment of the material at each grade level . Districts spend millions of dollars each year on new instructional materials. Basing purchasing decisions on incomplete materials will inevitably lead to disappointment and frustration. If you are considering new-to-market materials, prolong the review process to ensure that your district has reviewed the published edition that teachers will be using. One of the biggest predictors of a material's impact on student learning is its alignment to state standards. Before purchasing a new material, be sure to have an independent verification of the material's alignment to your state standards for each grade level you will be purchasing. Your teachers, students, and taxpayers deserve it.

While states and districts have engaged in numerous strategies to address Covid-related learning losses, the strategy getting the most attention and investment is high-dose tutoring. According to a February 2023 report published by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), states have spent $700 million of ESSER reserve funds to expand tutoring opportunities, including $470 million on large-scale, high-dose tutoring programs. This blog endeavors to provide tips, based on lessons learned from tutoring programs across the country, to help districts implement successful high-dose tutoring programs. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) regularly surveys a national sample of public schools about the impact of Covid-19. The December 2022 NCES Pulse survey included questions about the types of tutoring schools are offering: Thirty-seven percent (37%) of the public schools reported providing high-dose tutoring Fifty-nine percent (59%) offer standard tutoring Twenty-two percent (22%) provide self-paced tutoring . High-dose tutoring is one-on-one or small-group tutoring that takes place at least three times a week for at least 30 minutes per session. Tutors are educators or well-trained tutors and the tutor follows an evidence-based, core curriculum program. Standard tutoring is less intensive tutoring that takes place one-on-one, or in small or large groups. Tutoring is offered less than three times per week and tutors are educators who may or may not have received training in specific tutoring practices. Self-paced tutoring is tutoring where students work at their own pace, typically online. They receive guided instruction and move on to new material after mastering the content. Are all three types of tutoring programs equally effective? J-PAL's Tutoring Evidence Review analyzed the evidence from 96 randomized evaluations of tutoring programs and provides the following insights into what type of tutoring programs work best and for whom: Tutoring programs led by teachers or paraprofessional tutors are generally more effective than programs that used nonprofessional (volunteer) or parent tutors. Paraprofessional tutors include, among others, school staff members, undergraduate students in education, and service fellows. The effects of tutoring programs tend to be strongest among students in earlier grades, though a smaller set of programs at the secondary level were also found to be effective at improving learning outcomes. While the overall effects for math and reading tutoring programs are similar, reading tutoring tends to be relatively more effective for students in preschool through first grade, while math tutoring tends to be more effective for students in second through fifth grade. Tutoring programs conducted during school tend to have larger impacts than those conducted after school. During EdWeek's recent Essentials on Tutoring forum , Susan Loeb, professor and director of the education policy initiative at Stanford's Graduate School of Education, and Scott Muri, superintendent of Ector County ISD provided further, similar guidance about the attributes of successful tutoring programs: They target students' individual needs They are "intensive" meaning that they occur over a long period of time, daily or every other day for an entire school year They happen as part of the school day, either before during, or immediately after school when it's easiest to reach and engage students They use professional, trained tutors Tutors have access to student data showing where the students' needs exist Tutors rely on the district's curriculum so that the tutoring is aligned with the material students are expected to learn Contracts for tutoring services were "outcomes-based"; their continuation hinged on students' progress. As mentioned, high-dose tutoring is effective when aligned with the district's curriculum. This blog provides tips about using the district's existing materials to deliver standards-aligned tutoring. Providing high-dose tutoring is challenging for many reasons, including cost, scheduling, and staffing. If your district is (considering) partnering with a vendor to deliver tutoring service, Bart Epstein , a former executive at Tutor.com, provides this advice, "No school district should be paying for tutoring if kids aren't showing up." Sources: Barshay, Jill. 2022. “PROOF POINTS: Early Data on ‘High-Dosage’ Tutoring Shows Schools Are Sometimes Finding It Tough to Deliver Even Low Doses.” The Hechinger Report. August 1, 2022. https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-early-data-on-high-dosage-tutoring-shows-schools-are-sometimes-finding-it-tough-to-deliver-even-low-doses/. ‌Heubeck, Elizabeth. 2023. “Talking High-Dosage Tutoring: A Researcher and Schools Chief Share Strategies.”  Education Week , February 21, 2023, sec. Student Achievement. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/talking-high-dosage-tutoring-a-researcher-and-schools-chief-share-strategies/2023/02. “2022 School Pulse Panel.” n.d. Ies.ed.gov. https://ies.ed.gov/schoolsurvey/spp/. “Road to Recovery: How States Are Using Federal Relief Funding to Scale High-Impact Tutoring |.” n.d. Accessed March 3, 2023. https://learning.ccsso.org/road-to-recovery-how-states-are-using-federal-relief-funding-to-scale-high-impact-tutoring. ‌‌“The Transformative Potential of Tutoring for Pre K-12 Learning Outcomes: Lessons from Randomized Evaluations.” n.d. Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL). Accessed March 3, 2023. https://www.povertyactionlab.org/publication/transformative-potential-tutoring-pre-k-12-learning-outcomes-lessons-randomized.

A recent  EdWeek  article titled,  Why Printed Books Are Better Than Screens for Learning to Read addresses the debate over print vs digital materials for young learners in an interview with Maryann Wolf, the director of the Center for Dyslexia, Diverse Learners, and Social Justice at UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies. Wolf begins by saying that the answer is not binary. "There are advantages and disadvantages for each type of medium , depending on the purpose or intention." "For young children ,  physical books are best, audio is second best and tablet is a clear third."  While tablets are often more engaging, they promote "passive engagement."  Students learn to be distracted instead of learning to focus. "So between zero and five, the evidence has become quite clear that children's use of the screen is helping to develop the opposite of what we want in focusing attention."  Wolf points out that while print is more advantageous for learning, digital materials are useful tools for diagnostic screening and for skills practice, particularly for students with dyslexia or students who have limited background knowledge of a subject.  While students may perceive that they are better readers online because they can read faster, Wolf points out that students can read faster online because screens make it easy to scroll and skim. However, students need to learn deep reading skills using print first and then need to be taught to use those same skills when reading online.  Wolf concludes, "Books are really one of the greatest tools for the mind and should never be lost until we are assured that the same processes that were advantaged there are not being diminished by the other mediums."  An article in the Hechinger Report titled, “A Textbook Dilemma: Digital or Paper?” discusses Patricia Alexander’s review of research on this topic. Ms. Alexander is an educational psychologist and a literacy scholar at the University of Maryland. Despite numerous (878) potentially relevant studies on the topic, Ms. Alexander pointed out that “only 36 directly compared reading in digital and in print and measured learning in a reliable way.” Despite the need for further research on this topic, Ms. Alexander found that numerous studies affirm the finding that: “if you are reading something lengthy – more than 500 words or more than a page of the book or screen – your comprehension will likely take a hit if you’re using a digital device.” This pertained to college students as well as students in elementary, middle, and high school.     The research highlights several reasons why: Reading online is more physically and mentally demanding (e.g., “the nuisance of scrolling and the tiresome glare and flicker of the screen") than reading a textbook. Online readers may not concentrate as well, distracted by social media alerts, the temptation to browse the internet, etc. Reading a printed book leaves spatial impressions in your mind (i.e., where something was on a page) that may not occur with the same frequency online. Ms. Alexander also addressed whether “note taking on paper offers measurable advantages for learning?” For example, whether highlighting and underlining online versus on paper affected comprehension more positively. She concluded, “Those kinds of motor responses have never been of highest value in terms of text processing strategies.” Rather, “the studying strategy with ‘the greatest power,’ …. involves deeply questioning the text — asking yourself if you agree with the author, and why or why not.” The point of the research is not to identify a winner; print and digital materials are here to stay. As Ms. Alexander put it, “The core question when is a reader best served by a particular medium? And what kind of readers? What age? What kind of text are we talking about? All of those elements matter a great deal.” For more research on this topic, see " Don't throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension ." This blog from 2019 discusses a review of the research on this same topic. That research pertained to the best medium for students from kindergarten through college. The research is not trying to discern a winner in the debate. Rather, the core question the research is trying to answer is when does a particular medium best serve a reader?